TIMOTHY J. SHERMAN, AN INFANT, &C., ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. DAVID J. ROBINSON,
AN INFANT, &C., ET AL., DEFENDANTS, AND ALASKAN OIL, INC., D/B/A AOK STORE,
RESPONDENT.
80 N.Y.2d 483, 606 N.E.2d 1365, 591 N.Y.S.2d 974 (1992).
December 21, 1992
4 No. 274
Decided December 21, 1992
_________________________________________________________________
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
Michael A. Oropallo, for Appellants.
Laura A. Alderman, for Respondent.
KAYE, J:
This appeal asks whether a convenience store selling alcoholic
beverages may be held liable, under statutory or common law, for
personal injuries resulting from an indirect sale of alcohol to a
minor. We answer that question in the negative, as did the motion
court and Appellate Division.
On the evening of June 17, 1988, Michael Relf, a minor, presenting a
driver's license he had found, purchased a quantity of beer and wine
coolers from a convenience store operated by defendant AOK. Relf
allegedly purchased the alcoholic beverages with money pooled from
several other teenagers--including David Robinson and plaintiff
Timothy Sherman--who waited in a car parked in the lot outside the
store. There was evidence that after the purchase, the boys parked at
the side of a road for a half-hour, then proceeded to a drive-in
movie, and later attended a party. In the early morning hours of June
18, with Robinson driving and Sherman a passenger, the car was
involved in an accident, severely injuring Sherman. At the time of the
accident, Robinson had an elevated blood-alcohol level, allegedly due
to his consumption of the beer purchased by Relf.
Plaintiffs contend that AOK's sale of alcoholic beverages to Relf
renders AOK liable for Sherman's injuries under statutory or common
law because by selling beer to Relf (a minor) AOK caused or permitted
the sale of beer to Robinson (also a minor), who caused Sherman's
injuries. We agree with the comprehensive writing of Justice Hurlbutt,
affirmed by the Appellate Division, which dismissed the complaint
against AOK on summary judgment.
SNIPPETS:
This appeal asks whether a convenience store selling alcoholic beverages may be held liable,
On the evening of June 17, 1988, Michael Relf, a minor, presenting a driver's license he had
Relf allegedly purchased the alcoholic beverages with money pooled from several other
There was evidence that after the purchase, the boys parked at the side of a road for a
At the time of the accident, Robinson had an elevated blood-alcohol level, allegedly due to
Plaintiffs contend that AOK's sale of alcoholic beverages to Relf renders AOK liable for
We agree with the comprehensive writing of Justice Hurlbutt, affirmed by the Appellate
We first consider plaintiffs' claims under General Obligations Law §§ 11-100 and 11-101,
More than a century ago, the Legislature enacted the Dram Shop Act to provide a private right
the Act provides a cause of action for injuries caused by "any intoxicated person" against a
In 1983, the Legislature supplemented the Dram Shop Act by imposing responsibility on any
Liability under sections 11-100 and 11-101 attaches only in the event of an "unlawful" sale
However, the regulatory provision does not create a private right of action (Moyer v Lo Jim
Most notably, the General Obligations Law--unlike the regulatory provision--is explicit in
The plain language of the enactments specifies that the individual who by reason of
Nothing in the General Obligations Law imposed upon defendant a duty, merely because a
|
